Hodling vs Spend and Replace : What are your thoughts on why one strategy is better/worse than the other....

Just had an interesting conversation with someone and just wanted to bring it to a bigger audience for input.

Some hodlers believe by spending bitcoin you are actually admitting that bitcoin is less valuable than what you are trading for.

This actually made me pause and think - and I really enjoyed it. It felt really wrong to everything I believe, but the gentleman really had an interesting take on it.

I believe spending (and replacing) helps grow adoption.

My response was:

Yes, Bitcoin is valuable - but it is not more valuable than the services you purchase to live your life. You will always at some point trade your Bitcoin for medicine or a house or a nice meal. At some point in your life, other things will be more valuable than Bitcoin - this is almost by definition true, whats the point of hoarding bitcoin after all? Since you can't take bitcoins with you when you die.

The person who will sell you medicine when you need it will not take crypto, if no one is spending their crypto. If you think you will just trade your bitcoin for fiat and buy medicine for fiat.... well, you have just proven that fiat is more useful than bitcoin.

Isn't it infinitely more desirable to use Bitcoin directly? Mainly because its value will be orders of magnitude higher than when Bitcoin depends on fiat to be useful when you actually need funds.

submitted by /u/mrtest001
[link] [comments]

source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/j33dkh/hodling_vs_spend_and_replace_what_are_your/